The most recognised of these soldier poets were men such as Wilfred Owen, Siegfried Sassoon, E.A. Mackintosh and Isaac Rosenberg. These writers were disgusted by the false glory these pro-war poets gave war, that it would be ‘fun’ and wonderful to be part of the “…Holy War”, to “…uphold Right and crush the Wrong”. They aimed to startle and shock their readers into new ways of seeing and understanding the reality of war, and to challenge the social conventions of the time.
T
he realities of war seemed very far removed form the relative safety of the home-front. Thousands of young men joined up within the first few month of the war, and most did so gladly, happy to get away from the boredom of their every-day lives, and looking forward to proving their bravery and ‘manliness’.
The ‘social reality’ of war was very far removed from the ‘historical’ or factual realities. People worshipped the gallant and heroic sacrifices made by the soldiers at the Front, but did not realise that the real experience had nothing to do with gallantry or patriotism, but with pure survival. War was not seen as something terrible and wasteful of human life, but as a chance to have some fun, a chance for boys to prove themselves and ‘become a man’. The truth about the conditions on the battlefield was hushed and concealed under florid descriptions of what glories would await them on their return and the honour they would earn in “’God’s War’ to preserve all that is good and English…”
Where these promises did not lure young men to join up, the social pressure and guilt exerted on them surely did. The recruiting poems published in the newspapers of the time were scathing towards the young men who did not enlist, calling them cowards and ‘shirkers’. Poets used images of victorious returning troops, the girls who idolised them and ignored or even made fun of the men who stayed home, to persuade young men to join up.
From all sides, be it their parents, their church or their peers, they were under immense social pressure to enlist. Religious ideas were also often used in recruiting. Especially in rural Britain, religion played a large part in the lives of everyone, and this influence was used freely in persuading young men to join up. Poets such as Katherine Tynan spoke of the war against Germany as a holy war, against ungodly evil barbarians that were threatening the world order, and that it was their duty as god-fearing Britains to thwart this uprising evil.
This pressure was only increased by other pro-war writers, who wrote mocking verses to inspire guilt in the ‘shirkers’ who did not join up. Their light and dismissive tones of possible injuries and death disgusted the soldiers who had seen the true terror of war.
In an attempt to shock these writers out of their self-righteous indignation, Wilfred Owen, Siegfried Sassoon and their fellows employed sarcasm and irony to ridicule this attitude, or used graphic and detailed descriptions of the carnage and filth of the trenches to deliberately shock the naïve and staunchly patriotic civilians, who had no real idea of what the conditions of war were actually like.
S
assoon’s poem, ‘Does it Matter?’ is a good example of the use of sarcasm to startle his readers into new ways of seeing and understanding the realities of war.
The poem is written in a similarly nonchalant tone as the recruiting poems, yet it has a bitter and scathing edge which is very noticeable. It’s repetitive pattern of the question “Does it matter?” reinforces the message of the poem, that, yes, losing your legs, sight and sanity does very well matter!
The first lines of each stanza (“Does it matter? – losing your legs?...” etc.), are asked in a light, nonchalant tone, which can be seen as a direct sarcastic response to poems such as Jessie Pope’s ‘Who’s for the Game?’: “Who would much rather come back with a crutch / Than lie low and be out of the fun?” This comparison would have been immediately obvious to any contemporary readers, as these recruiting poems were universally quoted and even set in music. Sassoon’s intentions here were immediately clear to the reader.
“For people will always be kind…” The second line is also part of the repetition-pattern throughout the poem, to reinforce the main idea of the poem. With this line Sassoon asks, What a fickle recompense is kindness to a cripple, if he could still be whole?
The second stanza continues much in the same vein as the first, but also carries a strong and poignant image. “…As you sit on the terrace remembering / And turning your face to the light.” This image of a blind man turning his face towards the sun, whose warmth he can surely feel, but whose light is now denied him, is very touching and gloomy.
The second and third lines of the final stanza again scorn the casual attitude of Pope and other writers towards not only the physical, but also the mental damage to the returned soldiers. “…You can drink and forget and be glad / And people won’t say that you’re mad;” Sassoon here refers to what often happened to war veterans at the time: plagued by the terrible memories of their experiences, and without any real support or therapy, they often lost themselves in the bottle, and were considered to be crazy and not decent company. The final lines, “…For they’ll know you’ve fought for your country / and no-one will worry a bit.” are the final irony of the poem. People would all too willingly forget why these men went mad in the first place, and what experiences they went through “…to do their duty for their homeland.”
Honour and glory are only abstract concepts, suitable as social guidelines and for discussion in hindsight, yet they are small comfort in face of overwhelming terror and misery. Having understood this, Sassoon used his poetry to persuade the public into new ways of seeing and understanding the horrors of war, and to change their attitude towards the soldiers would or already had experienced them.
A
contemporary of Siegfried Sassoon was Wilfred Owen. Also a soldier, he shared Sassoon’s disgust for the misleading writings of the pro-war poets (especially Jessie Pope, for whom he had a particular hatred). In his poetry, Owen aimed to record the factual and historical realities of war, not a fictitious image of it. He is quoted to have said once, “Above all, I am not concerned with poetry. My subject is war, and the pity of war. …All a poet can do today is warn. That is why true poets must be truthful.”
And truthful he was. Owen did not shy away from describing the sickening and putrid facts of the war, indeed, he used these descriptions as a tool to shock and startle his readers, aiming to make them be aware of the romantic and misleading misconceptions of war.
Most of Owen’s poetry reflects this use of graphical descriptions, however there is one poem which particularly stands out in its realistic portrayal of death and misery.
‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ creates a vivid picture of the conditions on the Front. In the first stanza, Owen describes the setting, using similes and metaphors to make the picture clearer and more meaningful to the reader.
“Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, couching like hags, we cursed through sludge […]
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue…”
The men are utterly exhausted, to the point where they are indifferent even to the cacophony of the battle around them. They are “…deaf even to the hoots / Of gas shells dropping softly behind.” That the shells drop softly seems to underline that everything is somehow dampened, slow, and time seems suspended.
The next line breaks this spell, and the mood is shattered. In a burst of feverish activity, most of the troop manages to get their gas masks on in time, but one man does not. Owen describes his death throes with vivid language, purely designed to shock readers with graphic imagery. He describes the helplessness one feels at seeing someone die, unable to do anything but stand and watch powerlessly. “In all my dreams, before my helpless sight, / He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.”
At this stage, Owen directly addresses the reader, the patriotic civilian totally naïve of the realities of war:
“If in some smothering dreams you too could pace / Behind the wagon that we flung him in…” He goes on to describe the death of the gassed man: his “…white eyes writhing in his face…”, and his expression, “…like a devil sick of sin…”, with the “…blood come gargling from [his] froth-corrupted lungs.” This depiction aims directly to jolt the reader out of his predisposition of seeing war as glorious and ‘Right’, confronting them with the completely inglorious, horrendous and terrible reality, and in so doing, attempting to change the attitudes and values of the reader.
This style of writing is a great contrast to the flowery vague poems of Brooke and other popular poets of the time. They mainly refrained from mentioning any real facts and indeed any references at all to combat and warfare, and focussed instead on the glory and honour that could be earned.
Owen targets this sentiment in the last four lines of the poem.
These lines join directly to the first two lines of the stanza, completing the statement:
“If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
[…]
My Friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory
That old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.”
The last lines are Latin and can be translated as “Sweet and proper is it to die for your country.” This bitter final line is addressed to the people who lured and bullied young men into joining up. He refers to them as children, far too young to face such horrors. “…Ardent [keen or eager] for some desperate glory…” This line could refer to the fact that many young men actually wanted to join up, eager to get away from their boring everyday lives, and attacks those who encouraged them, using their enthusiasm to make them into gun fodder instead of warning them. Referring to “…that old Lie” with a capital letter makes the reader more aware of what a great lie it is, one that was known (by some at least) to be false, yet still told to mislead the men even further.
Owen’s aim in the detailed and graphic description of the death throes of the soldier are directly intended to negate the final lines, stating blatantly that there is nothing Sweet and Proper about war and death, be it for your country or not. Owen’s poetry again shows us that in the trenches, fighting had nothing to do with valour, courage or honour, but with pure survival. Owen seeks to make this clear to the reader, and with it alter their attitudes and values towards war.
S
iegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen lived during a time of social misconception, a time in which war was seen as an opportunity to have some fun and uphold Britain’s superiority in Gods war. Patriotism and naiveté influenced the attitudes and values of the time, which are reflected in the pro-war poetry published at the time. Owen and Sassoon were appalled and disgusted at this false and misleading attitude towards war, and used their poetry as a means to inform and persuade the readers that war was by no means godly, ‘sweet and proper’. They employed graphic accounts of the horrors of war, and scathing sarcasm to startle and shock their readers into new ways of seeing the realities of war. Their main aim was to alter the attitudes and values of the time, and to inform and warn the public of the mindless butchery of war, and of the false glory attached to it.
